WINCHESTER WITH EASTLEIGH DESIGN REVIEW PANEL

Date of meeting: 13.11.2018

Site: GE Aviation, Kings Avenue, Hamble-Le-Rice, Southampton, SO31 4NF

Proposal: Outline consent, with all matters reserved except means of access, for the relocation of cricket pitch off-site and improvements to existing bowls and football facilities on site to enable the erection of up to 148 residential dwellings (Use Class C3) with new vehicular access, car parking, work to highways, landscaping, and other associated works. The application also seeks the demolition of non-original extensions to Sydney Lodge and redundant factory buildings

Planning reference: O/18/84191

Design Review Panel Members sitting on the Panel: John Hearn (Chairman), Julian Livingstone, David Gregory & Scot Masker

Council Officers in attendance: Gary Osmond

Item presented by: Matthew Brewer & Diego Portales

Declarations of Interest declared: None

Comments:

The improvements to the scheme since it was seen by the Design Review Panel at the pre-application stage were noted and welcomed. However, the spaces and alignment of buildings still needs to be further resolved, in order to establish an appropriate hierarchy, formality and legibility throughout the development. Opportunities for textural layering and vistas throughout the scheme need to be taken. Of particular importance is how the main axis route through the scheme will be dealt with and what happens at either end of this axis. Does it have to stop with a building when a well framed functional space could be just as effective? The eastern end of this axis was one of the most important parts of the scheme for providing legibility and a sense of place and requires further thought.

The streets did appear to be a little dominated by car parking, which in some areas appeared to be overly generous. Where large areas are to be given over to parking, thought needs to be given to ensure that these are places in their own right (full consideration being given to shared space with pedestrians and landscaping) and not just hardstanding for cars or leftover and uncared for space. Particular care needs to be taken where rear gardens back onto these parking areas so that the domestic paraphernalia associated with everyday use does not negatively impact upon the visual amenity of these areas or that there is a zone of transition designed in taking the resident from the public space to the private garden space (in other words, not just a fence and gate as boundary).

While it was acknowledged that a balance needs to be struck between the scale of development and car parking, it was considered that there may be an opportunity to provide a denser development in this instance, especially relevant with the unique “horseshoe or doughnut” concept of the three storey surrounding the two storey inner core of buildings.

Street trees and landscaping throughout the site needs to be incorporated into the overall concept and master plan to ensure that in the public realm there is an established sense of hierarchy in the spaces between buildings which is well treated and considered. For instance strong tree planting along the main axial route would help to give it a feel of an avenue or boulevard which would help establish that hierarchy in the streets. It is also just as important as building form in defining the success of the scheme and creating a well designed place.

There was some discussion on whether the space around Sydney Lodge needed to be more formal however the functional needs of access to the factory for staff and HGVs was acknowledged. It was suggested that this main entrance into the site and the staff car park beyond could be landscaped in such a way so as to reflect the previous formal parkland setting to the house, which would acknowledge its original historic purpose as a country house. The new treed car park for GE does this to some extant but the treatment and relationship to Sydney Lodge could be further improved.

Given that the development is unlikely to be undertaken by the applicant should planning consent be granted, it was considered to be very important that the proposed design code is robust and well considered. The idea of character areas (consider fewer, maybe one less, as this would provide a simplified and more easily executed set of themes that each in their own right could be stronger designs with simple but better discernable palettes) and nodal points was noted but the code needs to also include details on how the hierarchy of streets is defined and how they should appear.